If it's true he can't effectively govern a diverse state after this - it is at least partly because of the overblown reaction. Plus you've got to be careful with "nobody who matters in any meaningful way" talk. Mobs have power even if they're full of people who "don't matter".
-
For most people’s jobs, it is true that their performance is largely unrelated to whether we like their expression, and their jobs shouldn’t be in jeopardy because they say or do something unpopular. But applying that argument to politicians is patently absurd.
Well, given that you're so keen on context, that claim demonstrates a lamentable ignorance about the motivations of the founders of the USA - check out de Tocqueville's Democracy in America (for example). Also, Burke, for example, on European context.
-
-
What a certain elite thought 240 years ago is irrelevant to a modern notion of democracy.
-
It's not irrelevant. It's an absolutely fundamental on-going issue in the theorisation of democracy. How do you avoid short-termism, and pandering, and populism, in systems of democratic representation?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.